Question about points

[u/lartich]

I have a question about this exercise. The answer says that this move is worth 6 points, but I only count 4.

If white plays here, the group is obviously alive, made 1 capture and has 5 points of territory, so 6 points in total. If black plays here, it's a seki and the left part of the corner is neutral territory, but the two inside liberties on the right should be considered white territory isn't it ? So 2 points for white, and a difference in outcome of 4 points.

Am i wrong for considering the inside liberties of a group in seki as points ?

[u/D0rus]

In Japanese rules (territory), eyes in seki do not give points, so it would be 6 points. In Chinese rules (area), they do give points, but so do the 2 alive black stove, so it would be 6 too.

Edit: corrected for the two living black stones. 

[u/lartich → u/D0rus]

Oh, ok thanks you !

[u/petete83 → u/D0rus]

With chinese rules it's still 6 points. The shared neutral points count as ½ point for each color.

[u/lartich → u/petete83]

Wouldn't that still make 4 points ? The shared point on neutral points would change the score from 2W-0B to 3W-1B so same score difference

[u/petete83 → u/lartich]

If w captures there are 15 points for w. If b extends it's 12w 3b. w+15 vs w+9, the difference is still 6.

[u/lartich → u/petete83]

Hmmm that's true...

[u/PotentialDoor1608 → u/petete83]

It looks like in this case, white can fill one of the two neutral (eye) points with a stone. Does that make a difference?

[u/petete83 → u/PotentialDoor1608]

It can fill one of the "eyes" but those count as territory anyway with Chinese rules.

[u/RedeNElla → u/PotentialDoor1608]

Check liberties. The neutral points are self Atari if played

[u/PotentialDoor1608 → u/RedeNElla]

You can play one of the two half eyes and it's still a seki.

[u/RedeNElla → u/PotentialDoor1608]

Those aren't neutral though

[u/Uberdude85 → u/petete83]

The shared neutral points count as ½ point for each color.

What? I don't think this is actually correct, this kind of shared neutral point scoring is only in Ing scoring IIRC (and could be other than half-half splits IIRC in early versions). In Chinese rules your points are simply your live stones plus your surrounded empty spaces, so no one gets the 2 dame in the seki. For convenience with the Chinese fill-in and half counting to 180.5 plus komi you can fill in those 2 dame with 1 black 1 white as it makes no difference to the score difference between black and white so you can still compare to 180.5 because every intersection on the board is being included, but if you are asking about the absolute score a player has you shouldn't add any half points for these dame.

[u/Andeol57 → u/Uberdude85]

I fail to see the difference. If something give the same amount of points to both players, it's exactly like if it didn't give anything. That doesn't impact the difference in score between the two players.

Does it only matter if people want to report how many point each player has individually? I always see game records giving only the difference like "W+4.5" anyway.

I guess it might be a trick to compare yose moves one way in a game that uses the other scoring.

[u/Uberdude85 → u/Andeol57]

Indeed it doesn't change the score difference between the 2 players. But my point is your score in Chinese scoring is your alive stone plus your surrounded eyespaces, not your alive stone plus your surrounded eyespaces plus 1/2 per dame in a seki. If you add a half per dame in a seki to both players it doesn't make a difference to the score difference, so it's fine to do as a trick to make the physical act of counting on a board easier, but it's wrong to say it's actually part of what counts as your points in Chinese rules.

[u/petete83 → u/Uberdude85]

I see, thanks for the clarification. My introduction to Chinese counting was actually with the Ing rules so I might have picked that up from there.

[u/Schrodingers_cat137 → u/petete83]

You were actually correct on the Chinese rule.

[u/Schrodingers_cat137 → u/Uberdude85]

You are wrong.

第九条 计算胜负 双方下子完毕的棋局，计算胜负采用数子法。

　　先将双方死子全部清理出盘外，然后对一方的活棋（包括活棋围住的点）以子为单位进行计数。 双方活棋之间的空点各得一半，一个点即为一子。 胜负的基准以棋局总点数的一半180又1/2点为归本数。凡一方活棋与所属空点的总和大于此数者为胜，小于此数者为负，等于此数者为和。 采用贴子方式的棋局，胜负标准另行规定。

[u/lartich → u/D0rus]

After some analysis, I think that while the internal liberties do count as points in Chinese rules, we have to also count the 2 black stones that are in seki, and in the end the number of points for this move will always be 6 whatever the rules we are using

[u/D0rus → u/lartich]

Oh that's a good point. I'm not used to Chinese, so no wonder I make mistake there.

I've edited the first message. 

[u/Telos06]

Whether or not you can make points in a seki depends on the rule set

[u/kw3lyk]

If black makes a seki, then the corner is effectively worth 0 points for white, so its a 6 point difference.

[u/Andeol57 → u/kw3lyk]

Only in Japanese rules. You can have points in seki in other rulesets.

[u/kasumi-himawari]

When would liberties count as points? Territory counts as points, not liberties. Neither of those is an eye, so under Japanese scoring rules, they would be dame. Under Chinese scoring rules, if white filled both in, black could capture the entire group by making a dead shape inside white’s territory.

[u/Andeol57 → u/kasumi-himawari]

Under Chinese scoring, those are intersections surrounded by living white stones, so they are points. The concept of eye does not appear anywhere in the rules. It's just a thinking shortcut.

[u/goperson]

Does it not depend on who's got the most and largest ko threats?

[u/Schrodingers_cat137 → u/goperson]

There is no ko. W A1 -> B C1 -> W B1, everything goes back. White can never kill black with a ko. And in rules with superko, white should not play A1.

[u/Extra-Sector-7795]

i think it makes seki. so 4 or 5 point reduction for white?